Although historically, languages were divided into three basic types (isolating, inflectional, agglutinative), the traditional morphological types can be categorized by two distinct parameters:
A language is said to be more isolating than another if it has a lower morpheme per word ratio.
To illustrate the relationship between words and morphemes, the English term "rice" is a single word, consisting of only one morpheme (rice). This word has a 1:1 morpheme per word ratio. In contrast, "handshakes" is a single word consisting of three morphemes (hand, shake, -s). This word has a 3:1 morpheme per word ratio. On average, words in English have a morpheme per word ratio substantially greater than one.
It is perfectly possible for a language to have one inflectional morpheme yet more than one unit of meaning. For example, the Russian word vídyat/видят "they see" has a morpheme per word ratio of 2:1 since it has two morphemes. The root vid-/вид- conveys the imperfective aspect meaning, and the inflectional morpheme -yat/-ят inflects for four units of meaning (third-person subject, plural subject, present/future tense, indicative mood). Effectively, it has four units of meaning in one inseparable morpheme: -yat/-ят.
Languages with a higher tendency toward isolation generally exhibit a morpheme-per-word ratio close to 1:1. In an ideal isolating language, visible morphology would be entirely absent, as words would lack any internal structure in terms of smaller, meaningful units called morphemes. Such a language would not use bound morphemes like affixes.
The morpheme-to-word ratio operates on a spectrum, ranging from lower ratios that skew toward the isolating end to higher ratios on the synthetic end of the scale. A larger overall ratio suggests that a language leans more toward being synthetic rather than isolating. 78
Some isolating languages include:
"A Computerized Identification System for Verb Sorting and Arrangement in a Natural Language: Case Study of the Nigerian Yoruba Language" (PDF). eajournals.org. Retrieved 4 April 2023. http://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/A-Computerized-Identification-System-for-Verb-Sorting-and-Arrangement-in-a-Natural-Language-Case-Study-of-the-Nigerian-Yoruba-Language.pdf ↩
"Analytic language". Encyclopedia Britannica. 20 July 1998. https://www.britannica.com/topic/analytic-language ↩
"Isolating Language". Glossary of Linguistic Terms. 3 December 2015. Retrieved 4 April 2023. https://glossary.sil.org/term/isolating-language ↩
Whaley, Lindsay J. (1997). "Chapter 7: Morphemes". Introduction to Typology: The Unity and Diversity of Language. SAGE Publications, Inc. ISBN 9780803959620. 9780803959620 ↩
"Lecture No. 13". bucknell.edu. Retrieved 4 April 2023. https://www.departments.bucknell.edu/linguistics/lectures/05lect13.html#:~:text=Languages%20that%20have%20no%20affixal,fewer%20affixes%20are%20called%20fusional ↩
"Morphological Typology" (PDF). studiumdigitale.uni-frankfurt.de. Retrieved 4 April 2023. https://moodle.studiumdigitale.uni-frankfurt.de/moodle/pluginfile.php/486924/mod_resource/content/2/Synthetic%20and%20analytic_Morpho_Typo.pdf ↩
"Polysynthetic language". Japan Module. Retrieved 4 April 2023. https://www.japanpitt.pitt.edu/glossary/polysynthetic-language ↩
"Isolating language". Sorosoro. 5 September 2015. Retrieved 4 April 2023. https://www.sorosoro.org/en/2015/09/isolating-language/ ↩
Paauw, Scott H. (2009). The Malay contact varieties of eastern Indonesia: A typological comparison (PDF). The State University of New York at Buffalo. OCLC 6002898562. Retrieved 8 August 2021. https://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~dryer/PaauwMalayIndonesia.pdf ↩
Kluge, Angela (2017). A Grammar of Papuan Malay. Studies in Diversity Linguistics 11. Berlin: Language Science Press. p. 22. doi:10.5281/zenodo.376415. ISBN 978-3-944675-86-2. 978-3-944675-86-2 ↩